Match statistics snapshot
- Ferencvarosi TC created the clearer chances on xG (0.47 vs 2.11, Δ 1.64).
- Ferencvarosi TC fired more attempts (20 vs 11 shots).
- Cukaricki was more accurate in front of goal (55% on target vs 30%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Ferencvarosi Tc |
|---|---|---|
| 0.47 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.11Lead |
| 1 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 7 | Shots inside the box | 14Lead |
| 1 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 10Lead |
| 6 | Shots on target | 6 |
|---|
| 4 | Shots outside the box | 6Lead |
|---|
| 11 | Total shots | 20Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Ferencvarosi Tc |
|---|---|---|
| 34% | Ball possession | 66%Lead |
| 72% | Pass accuracy | 83%Lead |
| 209 | Accurate passes | 465Lead |
| 290 | Total passes | 557Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Ferencvarosi Tc |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Ferencvarosi Tc |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Blocked shots | 4 |
| 4 | Goalkeeper saves | 5Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Ferencvarosi Tc |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 11 |
| 1 | Red cards | 0Lead |
| 5 | Yellow cards | 4Lead |